Friday, November 03, 2006

Or maybe My Name is Earl, The Office then the genius of Howie Mandel in Deal or No Deal.

Oh, wait. It's Thursday night. I almost forgot, naturally that means one of the biggest football games of the years is on: West Virginia vs. Louisville.

How appropriate that the "Big Game in the Big East" is on a Thursday night opposite a police procedural. Because no matter what happens tonight, I think it would be a crime if an undefeated Big East team should slip into the BCS title game over a one-loss SEC team.

I'll say it again (not that fans of those Big East teams would believe it), this isn't "hate" toward WVU or Louisville. Or the Big East. It's an honest opinion that, as so many college football writers, pundits and bloggers have said, a ton of teams across the country would be undefeated if they played the schedule WVU and Louisville played. And while the competition in the Big East isn't the fault of those schools, the non-con schedules are. As Irish Round Table points out, the Mountaineers had FIVE non-con games to schedule this year. But they filled them with the likes of Eastern Washington.

So, I'll tune in tomorrow (*sigh*, I guess I'll have to TiVo Ugly Betty). But it just seems to fit that this game is on a Thursday.

Louisville did play against Miami, which could have been a tough opponent. And they did beat the shit out of them.

It does suck that there is a media love affair with teams that haven't played anyone tough. WVU and USC were ranked so high this year because of their performances last year, and that's definitely not right.

I still think that Louisville does deserve some credit. The school was in a non-BCS conference (correct me if I'm wrong), joined the Big East--although the BigEast sort of has the playing level of a non-BCS conference, save for Miami, BC (before joining ACC), Pitt, and WVU--and has really dominated, unlike teams such as USF and Cincy, which continue to play like non-BCS teams. I think Louisville definitely has some talent there and would be pressed and able to exhibit it against tougher opponents.

The Big East champ and the ACC Champ should have to play a "play-in" game into the BCS, just like 2 teams do in the NCAA hoops tourney.

Hats off for taking the stand that a one-loss SEC team deserves more BCS love than an undefeated BE team. I wish the media took that stand more and maybe mid-major conferences (of which you can;t deny the BE has fallen into) would schedule tougher OOC teams.

If only there was a way we could decide this on the field. Like a system where the top 8 teams played each other head-to-head until there was only one left. We could call it ... a "play-off," because the teams play each other and if they lose, they're off. That sounds good. Has anyone ever brought it up to the NCAA?

Damn Greg, that's good work. And to make sure BCS sponsors don't lose their chance to advertise, we could call it the Nokia Big 8 Round, Tostito's Final Four, then the Capital One Championship Game. Different round games could be played in big bowl arenas- Rose Bowl, Orange Bowl, Cotton Bowl, Superdome, GA Dome, etc. so big cities couldn;t miss out on their usual opportunity for tourist cash. I think we're on to something. I like the name "play-off" as the term that I was thinking about for teams that get "jacked up" and then lose (or get "off") didn't seem appropriate for family tv.

You guys aren't stoked to watch this game? This game will likely determine who we play for the National Title. Must see indeed!

And let's not harp on Rutgers for scheduling weak teams to open their season. I mean come on...not three years ago this was the worst team in the nation, bar none. You have to build it up somehow, and I think Schiano has done an AMAZING job there. With that kind of history, really all you CAN do is schedule creampuffs, build up the win column, and then start recruiting better players off the bowl appearances. Bill Snyder patented this technique, I believe. If they become a top 25 mainstay year in and year out, and then they're STILL scheduling 1-AA teams, then there's a problem.

And I agree with Anon re: Louisville. They were never as bad as Rutgers, but yes, they were a Conference USA team two years ago. Now they have a shot to play at the top of the pile, and I think they've done everything they can with that opportunity. It's really not on them that the Big East is weak(ish).

Big East tougher than ACC? Are you kidding me? IMO, the ACC may be as tough as the SEC in coming years with teams like Clemson and Wake Forest (which has gotten some nice practice in by playing easy teams) beginning to rise up. This could be due to the fact that Miami and FSU (fuck 'em both--plus I like the Gators) are weak this year. But I think that BC may face a tough challenge from Wake Forest on Saturday. I think that WF may actually be pretty good. It is important to note that they have played a much easier schedule than BC, but the two teams match up in terms of stats. But then again, beating the likes of Liberty, UConn, and Duke is not the same as beating, say, VaTech 24-3.

Of course, it must be noted that the ACC recently acquired some tough BE teams.

As an SEC fan, I can't agree. The SEC has it's share of creampuffs: Ol' Miss, Mississippi St. Alabama, and Vanderbilt. And LSU (my team) has played some walkaways also (Arizona??). While I don't think the winner of the WVU/Louisville game should play for the BCS Championship, they should get a BCS berth.

Does the SEC have some creampuffs? Sure. So does the Big Ten. But go down the list 1v 1, 2 v 2 etc..., hell, adjust down and go down the list so it's SEC/Big Ten 2 v. Big East 1, 3 v. 2 etc... and the Big East would finish at best 1-7 (always potential for a fluke somewhere).

A good way for teams to better determine worth would be to add a rule the following rules:1. BCS teams must play at least 2 or 3 of their OOC games against other BCS schools2. Mid-majors would have to play all OOC games against BCS schools 3. No one could play 1-AA schools

Teams violating any of these rules would be barred from BCS bowls for that year (though they could still go to other bowls). Not only would it allow us to better gauge a team, but it would make for more entertaining match-ups.

Would it be perfect? No. Some teams won't be as impressive when you play them as they were when you scheduled them and some schools could attempt to only play the weakest of the BCS schools (though that could backfire, as seen by last year's Penn State team), but overall it would be an improvement.

Why hasn't anyone pointed out that the Big East has only eight teams? I thought the Pac10 sucked because of its low number, but the Big East has really pulled a fast one on the entire country. And two of the eight (USF and UCONN) weren't even playing Division 1-A football a few years back. NICE!The game between UL-WVU looked like a MAC game. Yeah, that was the two of the top 5 teams and the county...Defintely, Definitely Definitely. Seriously, I hope Rutgers runs the table and goes undefeated. Then I would like to hear an explanation as to why they don't belong in the National Title but an undefeated Louisville does.

Join me in storming the NCAA headquarters and demanding a 16 teams playoff.

Follow the MZone

Subscribe To

The MZone-slash-MichiganZone.net-slash-MichiganZone.blogspot.com is in no way affiliated with the University of Michigan and/or U-M football in any way. If you thought it was, frankly I'm surprised you know how to use a computer.